ArticlePLoS neglected tropical diseases2020
Performance evaluation of a prototype rapid diagnostic test for combined detection of gambiense human African trypanosomiasis and malaria.
Article in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Conducting active screening for human African trypanosomiasis with rapid diagnostic tests: The Guinean experience (2016-2021).PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2024Article
- Salivarian Trypanosomes Have Adopted Intricate Host-Pathogen Interaction Mechanisms That Ensure Survival in Plain Sight of the Adaptive Immune System.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Malaria Rapid Diagnostic Tests: Literary Review and Recommendation for a Quality Assurance, Quality Control Algorithm.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Time to Integrate Malaria and Neglected Tropical Diseases Control and Elimination.China CDC weekly · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 6 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMalaria is endemic in all regions where gambiense or rhodesiense human African trypanosomiasis (HAT) is reported, and both diseases have similarities in their symptomatology. A combined test could be useful for both diseases and would facilitate integration of the screening for gambiense HAT (gHAT) and malaria diagnosis. This study aimed to evaluate a combined prototype rapid diagnostic test (RDT) for gHAT and malaria.
methodsBlood samples were collected in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and in Uganda to evaluate the performance of a prototype HAT/Malaria Combined RDT in comparison to an individual malaria RDT based on Plasmodium falciparum (P.f.) Histidine Rich Protein II (HRP-II or HRP2) antigen (SD BIOLINE Malaria Ag P.f. RDT) for malaria detection and an individual gHAT RDT based on recombinant antigens, the SD BIOLINE HAT 2.0 RDT for HAT screening. Due to the current low prevalence of gHAT in endemic regions, the set of blood samples that were collected was used to evaluate the specificity of the RDTs for gHAT, and additional archived plasma samples were used to complete the evaluation of the HAT/Malaria Combined RDT in comparison to the HAT 2.0 RDT.
resultsFrozen whole blood samples from a total of 486 malaria cases and 239 non-malaria controls, as well as archived plasma samples from 246 gHAT positive and 246 gHAT negative individuals were tested. For malaria, the sensitivity and specificity of the malaria band in the HAT/Malaria Combined RDT were 96.9% (95% CI: 95.0-98.3) and 97.1% (95% CI: 94.1-98.8) respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of the SD BIOLINE malaria Ag P.f. RDT were 97.3% (95% CI: 95.5-98.6) and 97.1% (95% CI: 94.1-98.8) respectively. For gHAT, using archived plasma samples, the sensitivity and specificity were respectively 89% (95% CI: 84.4-92.6) and 93.5% (95% CI: 89.7-96.2) with the HAT/Malaria Combined RDT, and 88.2% (95% CI: 83.5-92) and 94.7% (95% CI: 91.1-97.2) with the HAT 2.0 RDT. Using the whole blood samples that were collected during the study, the specificity of the HAT/Malaria Combined RDT for gHAT was 95.8% (95% CI: 94.3-97.0).
conclusionThe HAT/Malaria Combined prototype RDT was as accurate as the individual malaria or gHAT RDTs. The HAT/Malaria Combined prototype RDT is therefore suitable for both malaria diagnosis and gHAT screening. However, there is a need to assess its accuracy using fresh samples in prospective clinical trials.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.